@davescm
I had to post bug report because their isn't a "human rights violation," button.
I'm not sure if you all have researched this and are satisfied that blatant textbook objectively identifiable fascism is okay or if you simply never expected that such an important milestone in humanities growth would be tied up with the program you use to color. =D
It literally is though.
Thank goodness I am not the only one sounding the alarm. Global human rights organizations are involved but the major tech side of the initiative seems to be moving forward without addressing the watchdog concerns about the blatant fascist solutions being presented for global challenges.
So before jumping on the "judgment of the guy who is an idiot savant" bandwagon, please consider I have autism and communication has become more difficult for me than ever since 2020. I may over explain or repeat myself. Pardon me.
As for repeating the error, Dave, I cannot even get there.
Then whatever about opinions and rhetoric, pardon me for saying I despise adobe. Though especially in light of the new information, I indeed despise Adobe. Other than that, not much of what I am reporting is "like just an opinion, man."
Fact: private self appointed group of tech giants, multinational, and publishers got together and defined AUTHENTICITY for the world completely undemocratically.
Fact: Adobe has rolled out an initiative to prime the public to accept a privately designed content verification system that mandates alterations to their work and gives a central authority power to determine truth from fiction without oversight or accountability.
My communication needs some clarity esp. seeing I haven't brought light to the blatant fascist solutions to real global problems. Textbook fascism; rile everyone up about the dangers of a common enemy and then get them to think you have their back, then they will go along with the fascist solutions. It's just a little weaponized human psychology.
There are human rights organizations involved in the Content Authenticity Initiative specifically because of the concerns I bring up.
At least I was relieved to see that the entire world hasn't lost their mind. I'm still questioning the sanity of visual content creators/artists who aren't as horrified their art is being edited as I am. Then again, it likely hasn't affected y'all yet. So I beseech your empathy and understanding to take the third person and imagine how you'd feel if your work were permanently altered, allegedly to combat misinformation but the label itself was misinformation. Misinformation of consequence to your career.
I've done a lot of research since the other day and it's not better than I thought.
My attorney had to backstep to bring in a partner when they saw what was occurring.
It's worse than I thought in the sense that Adobe has moved ahead despite having not addressed the ethical concerns the watchdog organizations have told them to address if this is to be done in good faith. The information has been shared publicly because that's the point of a watchdog, to alert us to danger.
One of the concerns is the fact that there is no oversight or accountbilty. IE they have set up a class system designed specifically and solely to help people discriminate based on the info they have mandated be editied into our work; info which they have total control over and can edit at any convenient time.
Another of the concerns is they are self appointed AUTHENTICITY police who first had to take it upon themselves to define authenticity for the whole freaking WORLD. Private, undemocratic, not elected, not appointed, major corporations with a huge conflict of interest define AUTHENTICITY for the world, then immediately put inauthentic information into my file without permission.
There are claims about the infallability of Content Credentials as the final word, absolutely right, in reporting the history of the content and edits.
Do you know where claims of a superior and infallable authority come from? It's not Fashion, though sounds similar. This infallable system already mislabeled someone; ME.
This self appointed authority to govern authenticity applies to our art, journalistic writing, marginalized people's calls for aid or justice, video, news, on and on and on.
I'm being 100% sincere and this is double checked.
It is even stated in their reports that a major concern is how they get the world to buy into their mandatory editing of EVERYTHING. Not to mention their absolute self appointed authority to shut down any opinion they don't want people to hear.
Take the time you need to make the connections. While a reasonable person might be tempted to think this is far fetched, the last 6 years aren't that forgettable are they? The content credentials are right there on your export page and they will definitely override your settings to include information they determine is necessary, whether it is misleading or blatantly inaccurate or not doesn't matter.
Big tech and the corporate oligarch have an obstace called the public good. This isn't hyperbole. Profits at any cost means polution, exploitation, worker's rights violations, deporting jobs etc. Special intersts have been widdling away at democracy for decades. They want to define everything, structure everything, direct everything, and police everything. And they want to do it without the public voice and interests being directly involved. They want to do it without oversight, without accountability, without any scrutiny. Scrutinize and guess what.. Fake News!
This reaks of gestapo piss. There are several egregious violations of democratic freedoms and the spirit of democracy. Private afilliations of multinational corporations and publishers getting together to define .. come on. AUTHENTICITY!!!
And then FORCE their system on the world???
Something like Content Credentials and the Conthent Authenticity Initiative is welcomed and of utmost importance to all of humanity. Which is why I must INSIST it not be coopted by the private sector. They have already failed the world if indeed they had the best intentions to begin with, by not being fully forthcoming, by self appointing, by doing it literally wrong, by ignoring concerns of watchdogs, by implementing something that alters the work of their paying customers without fully and clearly disclosing the information and the implications, basically by violating the very trust they claim to want to establish.
Of note though, in the firt place, anyone ever attempting to say they created the system that is the final word on authenticity is a danger to society. This is textbook fascism. Literal textbook, worldwide agreed upon post WWII definition of fascism.
SO as for my current issue with having my art I worked on for 6 months now permanently tagged as made with generative AI, Before we even get to, "Well did you use the generative fill? Maybe you..."
NO!!!!! In my first comment I referenced Minority report. Remember it is about the moral and ethical implications of arresting someone before they even commit a crime and punihing them as if they had. Here I am afraid one of you are going to suggest that the "infallable authority" has every right to label your work as generated by AI if you let your mind wander in that direction. Now we are talking about precognition and minority report. If it is an honest mistake it is still unacceptable. First of all, since it was involuntary it cannot be an honest mistake. Since it is the rollout of an initiative to increase public trust and tell people what is right or wrong, true or false then the mistake demonstrates they aren't up to the task. Worse, it demonstrates carelessness in the face of one of the biggest challenges humanity is currently facing.
A tool altering the work of the user IS UNPRECEDENTED in the first place! Tell me any creative content tool you paid for that ever watermarked your work.
Why didn't they? BECAUSE IT'S YOURS!!!
That is only one side of the problem. It is, in and of itself an egregious violation of trust, of artistic code, of ethics; perhaps the law. It is tricky with the law; since Adobe moved to a subscription model, they essentially have NO oligation to the end user, to you and me. They can change their terms whenever they want (fact check). What terms they may have included that aren't legally enforcable is yet another level of complexity. (My attorney doesn't know if that is the angle in or not yet. I also am awaiting a call from a human rights organization called Witness that has been directly involved in the initiative so I can get the most up to date information and find out what, if any, other legal action is being taken to attempt to at least force Adobe to have accountability.)
I remain deeply bemused and concerned. I am grateful for the attention to the thread.
I hope people will take the time to thoroughly think through the far reaching implications and consider what you are going to do the first time Google scarlett letters you, a friend, or a relative before they have a chance to respond to allegtions, let alone have their day in court.
Too far fetched?
Then imagine the first time you are completing a project for a deadline and you export it to discover the "infallble system that no one is to question" has labeled your art as AI generated when it's not and it disqualifies you from a major competition and causes your commisioner to withhold their contracted payment.
And geez. Before we even get to those horrendous things (that will indeed occur if I and others don't effectively share what we are witnesing with you) I'm absolutely pizzled that visual artists, graphics designers, photographers, any creator is sitting back in compliance as a major tech company YOU PAY alters your completed works.
I know I've said it, but it is unprecedented and is the ultimate faux pas of the very long tradition of artistic expression in humanity. Even if the tag were correct.
Finally, one cannot and never will build a system of trust by forcing it upon people.
This first step being forced foreshadows what is to come if left unchecked. It is the first step in a very painful march to the bottom of human potential, right into the heart of exploitation, cruelty, and suffering.
1 Correct answer
32
Replies
AdChoices